Marinha da Coreia do Sul

[akivrx78]

https://translate.google.co.jp/translat ... 2F23039171

A fonte da Marinha Australiana esta desatualizada já que China, Filipinas, Inglaterra, Japão e Malásia não participaram.

[akivrx78]

Video mais completo a partir de 1:07:30 participantes que compareceram ao evento, foi convidado 40 países, 22 confirmaram que iriam depois virou 15 e no final 10 compareceram, o próximo evento vai ser em 2028.

Se comentou achar estranho as bandeiras nos mastros dos convidados.

Bandeira em combate no mastro principal

Russia
Australia
Canada
Vietnã
Eua

Em eventos deste tipo no mastro principal se coloca a bandeira do pais anfitrião.

Brunei e Índia Navio de Combate

Tailândia bandeira Navio Grande de Combate

Cingapura meia bandeira da Coreia do Sul no mastro principal.

[akivrx78]

http://www.chosunonline.com/site/data/h ... 00695.html

KDX I e II com problemas no CPU, o sistema operacional cai a cada 20 horas, era para ter recebido upgrade em 2016 mas como as verbas foram cortadas se espera realizar o upgrade em 2020.
Uma vez que o sistema cai demora de 10 a 30 minutos para voltar a funcionar, com os sistema caído os navios não podem disparar o SM2 os outros armamentos funcionam no modo manual.


O CPU utilizado e o Pentium 586.

[akivrx78]

https://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mo ... 0010637012

a velocidade do alvo usado neste experimento é Mach 0,5.

a maioria dos mísseis alvo estava voando em altitudes muito mais altas e eram fáceis de abater, enquanto mísseis reais voavam no nível do mar para evitar a interceptação.

No entanto, o Instituto de Ciências da Defesa e a Agência de Defesa concluíram o experimento depois de apenas uma simulação de alvos supersônicos.

O dinheiro que foi para o desenvolvimento do míssil é de 160 bilhões de won.

Um adicional de 560 bilhões de won será adicionado à produção em massa.

[P44]

DSME gets funds to build 5th and 6th South Korean FFX II Daegu-class frigate

South Korean shipbuilder Daewoo Shipbuilding and Engineering (DSME) announced on November 14 it has been awarded a contract to build the fifth and sixth second-batch Daegu-class frigates for the Republic of Korea Navy.

Also referred to as FFX II, the frigates are an improved version of the Incheon-class (FFX) and are built by DSME and Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI).

The contract announcement on November 14 follows the delivery of the first ship in class, ROKS Daegu, which was delivered by DSME to the navy in February this year. Frigates number five and six are scheduled to be delivered to the navy by the end of 2022.

DSME is building the first two, and ships number 5 and 6. HHI has been contracted for the construction of the third and fourth frigate, and will likely be responsible for the delivery of the seventh and the final, eighth ship in the class.

At 2,800 tons, Daegu-class ships displace 500 tons more than their predecessors and measure 122 meters in length.

The second batch frigates are being equipped with a 16-cell Korean vertical launching system for defense against air threats and six torpedo tubes for anti-submarine warfare. Powered by Rolls-Royce’s MT30 gas turbines, the frigates are capable of reaching speeds of 30 knots, according to DAPA.

Daegu and sister ships will carry a towed array sonar system (TASS) in addition to naval guns and a Phalanx close-in weapon system.

The frigates are intended for a variety of missions including anti-submarine warfare, anti-air warfare, patrol, surveillance, search and rescue and exclusive economic zone protection.

A program to build the third batch (FFX III) frigates which will displace 3,000 tons and feature a phased array radar is also underway.

https://navaltoday.com/2018/11/14/dsme- ... s-frigate/

[akivrx78]

A cerimônia de lançamento do primeiro navio de treinamento da Marinha, o Hansan Do-Ham (ATH-81), foi realizada no estaleiro Hyundai Heavy Industries Ulsan na tarde do dia 16.



https://translate.google.co.jp/translat ... t=&act=url

[pmicchi]

http://www.chosunonline.com/site/data/h ... 00695.html

KDX I e II com problemas no CPU, o sistema operacional cai a cada 20 horas, era para ter recebido upgrade em 2016 mas como as verbas foram cortadas se espera realizar o upgrade em 2020.
Uma vez que o sistema cai demora de 10 a 30 minutos para voltar a funcionar, com os sistema caído os navios não podem disparar o SM2 os outros armamentos funcionam no modo manual.


O CPU utilizado e o Pentium 586.

que coisa, meu celular tem um processador mais potente que esses computadores que controlam os SM-2

[akivrx78]

Nenhum sonar, problema no motor ... Sistema de armas feito na Coreia com muitos problemas
19/05/06 10:02

https://translate.google.co.jp/translat ... 6417320%2F

http://www.chosunonline.com/m/svc/artic ... 9050680015

[FCarvalho]

Coreia do Sul estuda dois projetos de porta-aviões
10 de outubro de 2019

https://www.naval.com.br/blog/2019/10/1 ... KHHE-s0F1o

Agora o negócio vai ficar legal.

abs

[akivrx78]

O Nae seria para 2031 ou 32, a prioridade é a construção do submarino de 3000t de projeto nacional com vls para lançar misseis de cruzeiro, até 2030 eles querem ter pelo menos 6 unidades operacionais.

[FCarvalho]

No que é uma solução bem mais interessante e adequada à realidade naval deles. Um Nae pode não ser exatamente uma boa resposta para enfrentar os desafios que terão a frente. O Doko e seu irmão gêmeo podem muito bem suprir esta questão de cobertura aérea naval com os F-35B. Ou mesmo em uma solução mais rápida e prudente, como mais barata, derivar um ou dois novos navios baseados neles para operar uma maior quantidade daqueles caças e outros vetores.
Seriam ao final quatro navios com capacidade para operar caças embarcados e dispor a marinha sul coreana pelo dois sempre disponíveis todo tempo.
Fora isso, é mais um provável fornecedor de solução para o Pronae quando e se um dia este projeto sair do papel por aqui.
Capacidade de engenharia naval os coreanos tem de sobra.

abs

[Túlio]

Seriam ao final quatro navios com capacidade para operar caças embarcados e dispor a marinha sul coreana pelo dois sempre disponíveis todo tempo.

Boa sorte com o wishful thinking, pois do jeito que estão as coisas operar NAe é uma impossibilidade geográfica para a Coréia do Sul: espremida entre a China, a Rússia e cada vez em piores relações com o Japão, não teria por nem para onde movê-lo sem que fosse atacado por forças massivamente superiores a partir de terra (Aviação e mísseis). E, quando não tinha nada disso, a Rússia tentou passar por aquelas águas (Estreito de Tsushima) com encouraçados e todo mundo sabe o desastre que foi (1905); nem os ianques na 2GM botaram frota naquelas bandas, se o Japão diz NÃO ali, bueno, é não e fim.

Fora isso, é mais um provável fornecedor de solução para o Pronae quando e se um dia este projeto sair do papel por aqui.
Capacidade de engenharia naval os coreanos tem de sobra.

abs

Aqui eu, para variar, caí duro: aparentemente é a coisa mais natural do mundo imaginar um PRONAE Coreano para a Imperial, mesmo com o custo de um só barco pelado passando de USD 10B (sem Aviação, inclusive) mas algumas centenas do que pode ser o melhor MBT do mundo para o EB não pode, não dá, mesmo custando o Programa todo - e com tudo completinho - bem menos de 1/3 do New Opalão pelado. Quem sabe o @gabriel219 entenda, eu não consigo, assim, paro por aqui.

[gabriel219]

1/3 é muito. Calculo que um MBT-X seja por volta de uns R$ 12-15 Bi, juntando K2 + K-21, estrutura, treinamento, munição e equipamentos para transformar alguns M113 em viaturas Porta-Morteiros, Missile Carrier e entre outros. Isso me baseando na possibilidade do Governo Sul Coreanos subsidiando parte dos custos do K2 em troca da assinatura de um acordo Bilateral para zerar tarifas.

Isso não dá, mas USD 10 bi em NAe Coreano é de boas.

Eu sinceramente já desencanei de NAe na MB. Melhor pegar a grana e investir num Lineage 1000 Naval no lugar do P-3AM, Praetor 600 no lugar dos P-99 e controlar drones para fazer a tarefa de ataque, principalmente UCAV furtivos. Pode ter certeza que dois NAe vai pagar o custo disso ai e sobra.

[akivrx78]

Olhando o Japão como um "país inimigo virtual"? "Há também a possibilidade de colocar um porta-aviões na frente e pressionar a questão do Dokdo", diz jornal coreano

https://translate.google.co.jp/translat ... d0059.html

[akivrx78]

South Korea pursuit of nuclear submarines heats up regional competition

11 October 2019
By: Stephen Kuper

South Korea is allegedly reviewing plans to build a 5,000-tonne nuclear-powered submarine based on the French Barracuda Class submarine, which serves as the basis for Australia’s own Attack Class vessels – marking a major transition for the regional power.

As both China and Japan surge ahead with plans to build potent aircraft carrier capabilities, South Korea has joined the race and announced plans to build a modified large-deck aircraft carrier based on the Republic of Korea Navy (ROKN) Dokdo Class amphibious warfare ships – seemingly leaving Australia as the only established Indo-Pacific power without a plan for a traditional, fixed-wing naval aviation and aircraft carrier capability.

Building on this, the growing proliferation of advanced nuclear weapons systems, including the relatively crude, yet still capable submarine launch ballistic missiles recently tested by North Korea, and the increasingly capable nuclear-powered submarine fleets introduced by China and Russia, South Korea has moved to address a tactical and strategic shortfall: a lack of nuclear-powered submarines.

While seemingly a shock move, the South Korean strategic policy institute, the Korea Defense Network (KDN), commissioned a research review into the feasibility of developing an indigenous nuclear-powered attack submarine.

It is reported that the results suggested that South Korea consider building a nuclear-powered attack submarine modelled after the French 5,300-tonne Barracuda Class submarine, the design model for Australia's own fleet of $50 billion Attack Class submarines.

The South Korean predicament

For South Korea, the elephant in the room is the increasingly capable and recalcitrant North Korean regime. Accordingly, the only security measure appears to be a proven submarine-based missile capability would take the North's arsenal to a new level, allowing deployment far beyond the Korean peninsula and a second-strike capability in the event of an attack on its military bases.

North Korea’s own submarine force is burgeoning, as it has developed new conventionally powered subs capable of firing ballistic missiles – while the capability of such platforms remains unknown, they remain potent tactical and strategic factors for South Korean strategic planners.

The North is entering the final stage of development for a 3,000-ton submarine that could carry three SLBMs. The SLBM, called Pukkuksong-1, was reportedly successfully test-fired in mid-2016, and flew about 500 kilometres.

South Korean navy chief Sim Seung-seob told MPs that nuclear-powered submarines capable of longer underwater operations than conventional boats would be "most effective in finding and destroying North Korean submarines equipped with submarine-launched ballistic missiles", according to Yonhap News Agency.

The South Korean military has "recognised [the] necessity and effectiveness" of nuclear-powered vessels, he added.

While South Korea currently operates a robust fleet of conventionally powered submarines, including nine 1,200-ton KSS-I diesel-electric submarines and nine 1,800-ton KSS-II subs, both with technical assistance from German shipbuilding company Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft (HDW).

The north Asian nation is on track to build its own 3,000-ton vertical launch system and land-attack cruise missile equipped attack submarine known as KSS-III.

Enter Barracuda

South Korea has a relatively long history of pursuing a nuclear submarine capability, with a clandestine development and building program established in 2003 that was subsequently cancelled when the plan became public and was brought to the attention of the International Atomic Energy Agency challenging non-proliferation treaties.

It is believed that the KDN report favoured the Naval Group designed Barracuda Class nuclear attack submarine as a "realistic" model for the nation to base its nuclear submarine capabilities on.

A large part of this comes as a result of the low-enriched uranium fuelled reactor that powers the Barracuda Class vessels – France recently launched the first of its own submarines, the Suffren, at a ceremony in Cherbourg, attended by Defence Minister Linda Reynolds in July.

Suffren, and its follow-on fleet of six ships worth an expected US$10 billion, is powered by two K15, 150 MW nuclear reactors powering two emergency electric engines and a single pump jet propulsion unit – similar to the unit that has caused contention in Australia's political and strategic community. Designed with a top speed of over 25 knots while submerged, a crew of 60 (with space for up to 12 special operators) and an endurance limited only by food, with nuclear refuelling every 10 years providing virtually unlimited range.

Additionally, the Suffren and its follow-on vessels are designed to be heavily-armed with four 533mm heavy torpedo tubes as well as accommodation for land-attack cruise missiles and mines – this combination of strike capabilities enhances the lethality and combat capabilities of the French Navy at a time when the nation is beginning to expand its influence beyond the Atlantic with renewed focus on the Indo-Pacific.

This South Korean decision comes at a time when debate around Australia's own $50 billion SEA 1000 Attack Class submarine program is undergoing its detailed design phase, which aims to deliver a fleet of regionally-superior submarines at a time when half of the world's combat submarines are expected to be operating in Australia's region.

This decision raises plenty of questions for Australia and Defence Connect will be tracking developments closely.

Your thoughts

Korea's focus on establishing itself as a regional power capable of intervening in regional affairs serves as a model for Australian force structure planners – the comparable economic, political and demographic size of Australia and South Korea combined with the similarity in the platforms and systems operated by both nations serve as a building block for both interoperability and similar force structure models.

As an island nation, Australia is defined by its relationship with the ocean. Maritime power projection and sea control play a pivotal role in securing Australia’s economic and strategic security as a result of the intrinsic connection between the nation and Indo-Pacific Asia’s strategic sea-lines-of-communication in the 21st century.

Further compounding Australia's precarious position is an acceptance that 'Pax Americana', or the post-Second World War 'American Peace', is over and Australia will require a uniquely Australian approach and recognition that the nation is now solely responsible for the security of its national interests with key alliances serving a secondary, complementary role to the broader debate.

Increasingly, multi-domain air power and highly-potent, future-proofed submarine capabilities play an important role in the efficacy of naval forces and serves as a key component in both the force structure and capability development plans for both South Korea and Australia.

These similarities support not only closer relationships between the two nations that share unique geo-political and strategic similarities but also provide the opportunity to develop robust force structures to respond to the rapidly evolving regional strategic environment.

Both fixed-wing naval aviation and amphibious capabilities are one of the key force multipliers reshaping the Indo-Pacific. The growing prevalence of fixed-wing naval aviation forces in particular serves to alter the strategic calculus and balance of power. Get involved with the discussion in the comments section below, or get in touch with Stephen.Kuper@momentummedia.com.au r at editor@defenceconnect.com.au.

https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/marit ... ompetition